Editorial: E3 doesn't care about the PC

The Game Critics Awards are a big deal. They're the Metacriticization of E3: after the show, more than 30 publications vote on 20 categories of awards, their ballots swimming together like a school of trophy-shaped fish. (PC Gamer is a few of those fish, too.)

The awards have a mixed, embarrassing history when it comes to the PC. Let's revisit the last decade of Best PC Game winners:

2012 - XCOM: Enemy Unknown

2011 - BioShock: Infinite

2010 - Portal 2

2009 - Star Wars: TOR

2008 - Spore

2007 - Crysis

2006 - Spore

2005 - Spore

2004 - Splinter Cell 3

2003 - Half-Life 2

2002 - Doom III

2001 - Star Wars Galaxies

Were we really that overwhelmed by Doom III and SWG? But yeah: Spore. How did we get it wrong—so Price Is Right Fail Horn ingly-wrong— thrice ? Spore is exactly the sort of game that woos multiplatform gaming critics that aren't looking closely—it's an amusing toy, an easily-explained curiosity from The Faraway Eccentric Continent of PC Gaming. On a ballot, Spore was an incredibly safe bet for someone who didn't see everything the PC had to offer at the show—like Dawn of War II in '08, or F.E.A.R. in '05. That this fooled us three times is evidence that collectively, gaming media hasn't examined seriously what happens on the PC at E3.

A PC-exclusive game hasn't won Best Original Game since 2006 or Best of Show since 2005. Both winners were Spore. But hey, let's not dwell on that bleak and multi-appendaged past. 2012 was a decent year for PC exclusives at E3. There were plenty to pick from, and absolutely none were officially recognized: Neverwinter, SimCity, The Elder Scrolls Online, Hawken, Otherland, End of Nations, Shootmania Storm, MechWarrior Online, Natural Selection 2, World of Warplanes, Arma 3, Company of Heroes 2. The stand-out omission from the awards list, though, is PlanetSide 2 . It should've won Best Online Multiplayer. It should've won Best PC, and it could've won Commendation for Innovation.

http://youtu.be/viKwpkC_P9s?t=7m55s

PlanetSide 2 isn't some exotic animal. It's sci-fi Battlefield, but better, bigger, more beautiful, and it never sleeps. It also wasn't sequestered in some obscure corner of the show—it was the first thing you saw when you walked through the doors of West Hall. You couldn't miss it. Anyone could prance up and play it without an appointment. IGN, Polygon, GameSpy, and Game Informer did give it significant nods . I wrote in our personal E3 picks post: “Occupying someone else's base means something beyond an icon changing colors on your HUD—just by contending for an outpost, you're earning a tiny trickle of resources. Own it, and that earned-over-time allowance extends to your whole empire (while being denied to the enemy). The magic of that mechanic is apparent even in an hour-long play session with a character I'll never use again in a crowded, loud convention center. Whether you like it or not, you're a part of something.”

Sure, The Last of Us —the game that won everything—looks nice. It's genetically-engineered for critical attention: Uncharted and zombies and movielike and full of those meaningful moral choices we can't get enough of. It'll probably enjoy plenty of high review scores and plenty of eye-level shelf space at GameStop. My peers were wooed enough by it to award it Best of Show, Best Original Game, Best Console Game, Best Action/Adventure Game, and give it a Special Commendation For Sound.

Maybe everyone played PlanetSide 2 and just wasn't moved by its unprecedented scale and ambition, staggering balance of tactical complexity and accessibility, or original engine technology that makes Unreal 3 look like calculator firmware. I think that's the sort of next-generational newness we should be drawing attention to. I don't own a tablet, so I hope that's an indication for how underwhelmed I am by tie-in apps, but did you see PlanetSide's jaw-dropping tablet/browser/mobile-driven infrastructure that lets you see dynamic strategic maps and join voice chat without being in-game? Egad.

Call it what you want

What's most upsetting are the names of the awards themselves. They're undeniably skewed to reward the companies that put on press conferences and that spend thousands of dollars making the show an expensive spectacle: Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo. The PC doesn't have a press conference, of course (although we've daydreamed plenty about what it'd be like). And like a very-talented cousin that Sony doesn't want overshadowing itself at its own talent show, PlanetSide 2 creators Sony Online Entertainment don't get a second of stage time at Sony's conference . Coincidentally, critics don't have many categories that invite celebration of the PC.

Since 2010, game writers have picked a Best Motion Simulation Game, a relatively recent trend, but inexplicably we can't nominate a Best MMO. 13 dungeon-raiding, gold-farming years after EverQuest, and MMO isn't a comparable genre to racing, strategy, or “social/casual,” which each have their own award? In "Best Hardware/Peripheral" components compete with controllers and consoles in the same incongruous, Frankenstein-category.

The oddest and least platform-agnostic award is "Best Downloadable Game.” Commenting on this makes me feel like a student who takes the awkward duty of telling his teacher that his chalkboard math is wrong. “...Excuse me? Every game on PC is downloadable.” The award was added in 2009, so it was absolutely a response to the healthy niche that $5-20 games have carved for themselves on XBLA and PSN. But if the goal is to highlight smaller-budget games, why not, y'know, make a Best Indie Game award? The Game Critics Awards have never had such an accolade in their history.

Sure, indie games don't have the largest footprint at E3 (a separate issue that I'd be delighted to yell about), but they do have IndieCade, a small hub of games hosted off the show floor. Especially with Kickstarter's emergence, it's a complete failure to reflect the industry we work, buy, and game in that there's no official opportunity for critics to praise indie games.

I know we're usually encouraged to shrug off mainstream game awards, like the ones that appear on television. But this isn't one of them, actually. This is the closest gaming media comes to having a collective voice about something. It's the one instance where we're communicating as a single organization. It's an opportunity to get it right. And on the PC, we totally aren't. If we're not prepared to have a set of awards that at least fundamentally reflect the kinds of experiences millions of people are involved in—MMOs and indie games among them—what are we doing?